Why Switzerland Is Still Free and America Is Not

by Ron Holland

The American Time magazine article headline asks, “Will Switzerland Vote to Ban Minarets on Mosques?”

Swiss citizens are becoming concerned about the threat that Islam presents to their traditional culture, economy and religious institutions. As an American, I know how I would vote were I Swiss but the decision will be made by the Swiss electorate as they have this referendum right on all issues.

In Switzerland, the people still rule and have the ultimate right to decide decisions above the government or parliament. Through the right of referendum they can cancel legislation and with the initiative they can pass or create legislative action on issues parliament refuses to act upon.

The bias and closed statist views shown in the article is business as usual for the US media elites out to protect the American political establishment and are so evident in this headline and article. It isn’t the question they asked but rather the question they didn’t dare ask is the “700-lb gorilla in the room.”

Quoting from the article, “Critics say the SVP, the largest party in Switzerland’s coalition government, has taken advantage of the country’s unique brand of direct democracy to push its populist, anti-immigrant agenda on the Swiss electorate. Citizens have the right to propose new laws in Switzerland – the only thing they need to force a nationwide vote on an initiative is a petition of 100,000 signatures.”

The question not asked is why doesn’t the American electorate have oversight over legislation and unpopular government regulations in the United States like in Switzerland? Imagine if 4% of the American voters signed a petition requiring a nationwide vote “yea or nay” on the banking bailouts, going to war in Iraq, auditing the Federal Reserve, nationalized health care or on the trillions in new Washington debt added because of the financial meltdown. The United States would still be a decentralized republic with limited government had we had the political option to hold back Washington and the special interests.

How America would be different if we had Swiss-style political rights to restrain government where the people rule instead of the special interests. Imagine an America where the billions in graft and political influence that control Congress could still buy legislation but not ultimate control if we as a people could overrule their actions.

What if the will of the people still ultimately controlled the political system and direction with true limited government at the federal, state and local level? Imagine the American electorate overriding Congress and demanding a strong dollar backed by real gold reserves, an audit of the Federal Reserve, a rollback of the bailouts, a declaration of war for foreign military intervention, the abolishment of the Patriot Act and a return to banking privacy.

Yes, a Swiss political party (The Swiss Peoples Party) promotes a nationalist agenda to the Swiss voters and they will ultimately decide in referendum yes or no on the issue. This is currently impossible in the United States but Swiss direct democracy and limited confederation government have worked in Switzerland for hundreds of years.

This is far superior to the two-party monopoly in America where the elites controlling both parties can push their self-serving agendas without restraint. Currently, short of the Tenth Amendment movement, state nullification or outright state secession, there is no real effective way to push back against Washington.

Until the American people can find a way to restrain the Federal government, the bureaucracy and the judiciary, the best place for Americans to secure and safeguard their wealth is outside their own country. Switzerland is one of the best jurisdictions to consider because their political system has preserved the rights and freedoms we once had as Americans. Still the ultimate problem for Americans is the necessity to restore our liberties at home because history has shown that wealth without liberty is only a temporary condition at best.

I say, it is time to take a real look at direct democracy in the United States or else Americans who value their property and liberties will have little choice but to first transfer their wealth to safety outside the US as it will be lost in the coming crash of treasury debt and the dollar. Next we must stand and fight the Washington leviathan through the political tools of the 10th amendment and John C. Calhoun’s political ideal of nullification both of which the Feds will probably just ignore. Our final democratic political tool is to exercise the political right of state-by-state secession with all the political and historical baggage this entails.

Trust me, Swiss style direct democracy in the United States would be an easier way to control Washington and the special interests but we only have a few years before the Washington debt and dollar collapse is upon us. Therefore I’ll close with a question. Is anybody here for secession?

Ron Holland works in Zurich and is a co-editor of the Swiss Mountain Vision Newsletter.

Post navigation

One Response to Why Switzerland Is Still Free and America Is Not

I would like to propose what we shall call, The Doctrine of the Perpetual Negative. When the Constitution says that no power shall be exercised by the general government , that negative cannot be repealed or overridden in any way Legislative, Executive or Judicial under this Constitution except through the next Constitutional Convention.The reason is that when the Constitution says, for example, that there may be NO direct taxes, the the proposal to override it, to repeal it, violates the prohibition. The proposal, though it later be an Amendment, is itself at all times Unconstitutional, thus illegal, and null and void! Negatives may not be repealed. I submit that the 10th Amendment supports this view as well and would love to see it debated.

Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments,
which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several
States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode
of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which
may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any
Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article;

AND that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage
in the Senate.

The 17th Amendment certainly deprived some States of their sufferage in the Senate.
Perhaps we would be wise to repeal the 17th Amendment! According
to the 10th Amendment , the States are distinct from the People. This is talking about the State Governments.

Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina and Virginia did not ratify that amendment and were deprived of their equal suffrage in the Senate, thereby profoundly effecting the integrity of every Amendment to the Constitution!

Also, the unseating of the Senators of these states for their refusal to ratify Amendment 14 constituted “exactly” that prohibition, AND that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage
in the Senate.
The argument that the Senate shall be the sole judge of the qualifications of its members, used to justify their expulsion, flies directly in the face of Article V. Likewise when attempting to balance the assertion that attainders of treason are legal with other lines that declare that no attainders of any sort are legal. Likewise whan the Constitution proclaims with great bombast that it is Supreme over State Laws and Constitutions, when it has no jurisdiction over said laws and Constitutions. Nonetheless, it is already done. The 17th Amendment is garbage.

I also would like to show you a few other things in the Constitution that I am sure you will find to be very interesting.

Article 1. Section 9.3} No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall
be passed.

I hate to have to break this to you, but the 14th Amendment fails these
basic tests of Constitutionality. That amendment is a bill of attainder
and it was passed ex post facto. I will not even mention the coercion
and illegal expulsion from Congress of our Representatives and Senators
for our failure to ratify this Amendment. The history of this amendment
is a three ring circus of lies and murder.

Article 3. Section 3.2} The Congress shall have power to declare the
punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work
corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person
attained.

This is really great. Remember that Article 1.Section 9.3} declared
that Congress may not pass Bills of Attainder or ex post facto laws. Now
we see an exception or a mistake.
Attainders of treason are permitted with some very serious restrictions
on them to protect the descendants of the traitors. That is us, by the
way. The entire problem is the 14th Amendment.

The value of the slaves and Southern war bonds concern us here. That value is the forfeiture that is Constitutionally bound to be returned to the Southern people , as we shall not suffer Corruption of Blood or lose our property except during the lifetimes of the Confederate Politicians and Soldiers. They are now all dead. Also, the theory known as the Incorporation Doctrine
is defunct.
The application of the Incorporation Doctrine is Corruption
of Blood and is Unconstitutional. We, the Southerners living now, are
not and have never been Traitors to the United States. We are thereby
under the jurisdiction of the original Constitution , or else Corruption
of Blood is being allowed to function as the Supreme Law of the Land
rather than the Constitution of the United States. This cannot continue.

I propose that any one of the Southern States expelled from Congress to force their ratification of the 14th Amendment, simply repeal their states ratification of the 14th Amendment. That alone would tie EVERYTHING up in the Federal courts for the next 20 years. Liberty would blossom again.

Several years ago, I proposed an idea that went nowhere. It was a proposed Amendment that would empower the two Senators from any three states to remove by application , to the President , any Federal official or Judge, Supreme or otherwise, who violated, in their view, the application of the Constitution to their or any other State or States. The only officials Executive or Judicial exempt from this power would be the President and the Vice-President. It would declare the Incorporation Doctrine null and void, and end lifetime judicial appointments.

I believe that secession as a practical matter ceased to be a wise option after the Constitutional Convention. Like Jackson, I regard America as perpetual. I do believe that a new Constitutional Convention would be a much better alternative than secession. I am completely against militarized states and nations, and I personally favor an end, a total end , to the American Empire and our support for Israel. Ron Paul has some great ideas and I would think that we would be wise to avoid violence between Americans at very nearly all costs.